Raf

I haven't finished reading the initial post, but I wanted to make an observation that might be relevant. VPW, to the best of my memory, never said it was impossible to fake SIT. He said it was impossible to counterfeit. What's the difference, you might ask? Glad you asked. I want you to assume SIT is real. Just assume it's real. More difficult for me these days than for most of you, but I'll play along: Speaking in tongues is producing a language. THAT is the genuine. So my take on what VPW was saying is that if you speak in tongues, you produce a language. And THAT can't be counterfeited. Taking a more skeptical/logical approach and carrying it to the end: Wierwille was saying that IF you speak in tongues AND you produce a language, THAT is of God because the devil can't counterfeit it. In other words, if your SIT is of the devil, then it's not SIT, according to Wierwille. I think that's as far as I can take my opinion without going off topic.

Four sequels. The last and least was released in 1988. The one before that gave us a movie line arguably more famous than the super famous line from the first film.

This movie(A) is based on a true story. In the movie(A), one of the main characters goes to the movies. The movie(B) he sees is actually based on his life, a little loosely. The movie(B) (a real movie you've probably seen, with lots of quotable lines and four sequels) was loosely based on the same story as movie(A). Astrological signs figure prominently. The real life person portrayed in movie(A) attended a premiere screening. Which means, a man went to see a movie, where he saw a man playing himself going to see a movie where a man plays himself. The genre is crime. Name either movie(A) or movie(B)

Wow. Correct, and that was a LOT of trivia! Well done!

Three unrelated guys play brothers. The name of the show relates to the three brothers. But they're not the main star. The rest of the clues aren't helping me at all, so I will guess then Google. Three brothers, not the MAIN characters, means they're all related to someone else. So it's either My Three Uncles or, more likely: My Three Sons

Hubba hubba woot woot!? Raquel Welch

This movie(A) is based on a true story. In the movie(A), one of the main characters goes to the movies. The movie(B) he sees is actually based on his life, a little loosely. The movie(B) (a real movie you've probably seen, with lots of quotable lines and four sequels) was loosely based on the same story as movie(A). The real life person portrayed in movie(A) attended a premiere screening. Which means, a man went to see a movie, where he saw a man playing himself going to see a movie where a man plays himself. The genre is crime. Name either movie(A) or movie(B)

Of Mice and Men Gary Sinise Forrest Gump

Ok. It's Con-Air.

For the record: I'm a reporter, not a columnist (although hope abounds). It's the Sun Sentinel, not the Miami Herald (although a shared content agreement means they get to run my stuff, the Herald does not pay me anything. We are what historians call "competitors"). But most importantly, TeachMeVP voluntarily broke his posts up into paragraphs and followed my request that he confine his posts to one thread instead of creating 10,000 threads with one post each. He did this, I must say, graciously, without putting up a fight, without complaining about the dozens of threads that I hid and am unable to get back to. He's been nothing but gracious about all of this. Give him the credit he deserves. It took a jarring bit of action, but he clearly got the message, I think.

No? Hmmm. No? Hmmm. Ah. I had the right movie, but i thought Connery was in it because I confused it with The Rock. That reminds me of... I'm rambling, aren't i? Snapping out of it.

Not a play on the title. A hint on a star.

Sho. You're lishting everyone but the shtars of thish film?

Armageddon ?

Teachmevp, Thanks for being a good sport about all this. I apologize for falsely indicating that you had not denoted the source of these posts. I was flat out wrong. I want everyone to know that teachmevp went along with all the changes without uttering a peep in protest. Just went with the flow. Made this task easy.

You Get What You Give New Radicals

Maverick Jodie Foster Sommersby

Paw's back!

Left Behind Free post

Trust me, I have the dates right. The star of the first movie was a TV star who played a reporter. The star of the remake was an Oscar winner who played a pilot. The villain in the original was played by, pretty much, a nobody. The villain in the remake was played by nobody.

Well, yeah.

The original was not terribly popular as movies go. The remake was extremely unpopular, though it did not win any Golden Raspberries. The lead actor in the remake did not play the same character as the lead actor in the original. However, both characters were featured in both movies.

"But you were, were, uh..." "In a coma? Nothing like having your face cut off to disturb your sleep! Read the newspaper lately?"

Make up your mind!

I think your posts would benefit greatly from the use of the ENTER key to create whole new paragraphs. Just a thought.